Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 835

Archive 830

←

Archive 833

Archive 834

Archive 835

Archive 836

Archive 837

→

Archive 840

United Daughters of the Confederacy Formation and Purpose Edits

I originally asked to replace this quote:

"Like the KKK's children's groups, the UDC utilized the Children of the Confederacy to impart to the rising generations their own white-supremacist vision of the future."

With this quote from the same source (Kristina DuRocher's Raising Racists) “The object of the organization included uniting the “children and youth of the South in some work to aid and honor ex-Confederates and their descendants.” The Children of the Confederacy was intended to “indoctrinate southern youth into the culture of the Confederate ‘Lost Cause.’” Another editor offered these two quotes, which I also think might work better that the DuRocher quote currently on the page:

    "When UDC took up the cause of history they did so as cultural guardians of their tribe, defenders of a sacred past against Yankee-imposed ignorance and the forces of modernism. They built moats around their white tribe's castles to save the children from false history and impure knowledge." (Blight)
    "the perpetuation of conservative class values, as well as a pro-southern version of history" in oder to "creditably fill the place of men and women who have in the past given the [South] both name and fame."  (Cox)

galndixie (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)--galndixie (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

This belongs on that article's talk page. The RFC will summon other uninvolved editors. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Tim, this has been on the talk page for months, and it's also been an Rfc. I brought it to the teahouse because I was told that could possibly help in getting the article changed. I'm new at this, so any help or advice you can give me would be appreciated. Thanks. galndixie (talk) 12:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)--galndixie (talk) 12:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey galndixie. The RfC has been open just shy of two weeks, and these normally run about 30 days. Having said that, if there is a local consensus that the content is appropriate, then simply put, the content will probably remain for the foreseeable future. It's usually a good thing to have a diversity of opinions among editors, but that also means that not everyone will always get exactly their preferred version of an article. Having said that, I have left a brief note at the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard to attract more robust participation in the ongoing RfC. GMG^talk 12:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. galndixie (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)--galndixie (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Edits to the formation and purpose of the UDC

It's been on the talk page for months now, and the same group of editors over and over will not allow it to be edited. It's been an RfC, and the same group of people are doing the same thing. They won't even change it to the quote they suggested. I don't understand this process, and was told that Teahouse could possibly help with this. Please, can you look at the talk page and tell me what to do next? --galndixie (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome, Galndixie. It really helps to provide links to pages you have concerns over. This makes our lives so much easier in answering you, as not everyone knows what UDC even stands for. You seem to be referring to United Daughters of the Confederacy, this talk page discussion plus the ongoing RfC you opened immediately beneath it. It looks to me like the RfC has not yet been closed. I will leave it to others to wade through the discussions and offer suggestions as my excuse is that it's very late here in the UK, Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC) Nick Moyes (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, Nick. I would certainly appreciate your help here. The page link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Daughters_of_the_Confederacy. In the last few years, the page has had many modifications, and it now looks extremely biased against the organization. In the opening statement, it talks about 'historians' view it as 'white supremacist', and the UDC denies that claim. I think that statement needs to be clarified, since it's not highly likely that all historians view it that way, though certainly some do, and that is strictly their opinion and not documented fact. It should say 'some historians'. In the formation and purposes section, a statement has been added referencing the KKK, and the UDC isn't a KKK affiliate, though this statement seems to strongly imply that. For months several people have tried to have this remark changed to more subtle and less biased language, using less accusatory quotes from the same references they cite for this statement. The editors refuse to cooperate or consider any change. One refusing editor even offered two other quotes from the already used reference authors, which I fully agree with using, either or both of those statements would be much better than the vague and biased statement now used. Those two statements explain why the UDC appears to the author to be similar to the KKK, in the reference author's view. And yet they still will not allow the change to or the addition of these statements. The second anyone sees the KKK reference, it sends a biased yet unfounded message. It seems that the page has become more of a 'political statement' and less of an informative and unbiased article. I'm not sure how to proceed, I am very new at this, and any help and assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Nick. galndixie (talk) 12:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)--galndixie (talk) 12:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Also see section #United Daughters of the Confederacy Formation and Purpose Edits above. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Galndixie: Thanks for coming back to me with that invitation. Despite it being a new day now, I feel I must politely decline to get further involved. It is not a topic I have any experience of, nor time to delve into the intricacies of past discussions and disagreements so that I could offer a worthwhile opinion. There are others more able and willing editors than me to offer input (and I see that at least two Teahouse hosts and admins have done that recently), and there appear to have been a number of RfCs run to gain consensus there. I can see it's an article that galvanises opinion. As always, it's what reliable sources say about a topic that we care about, not what an organisation says or tries to say about itself. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Company/product mixup

Hi,

I'm doing some Google knowledge graph work for FileMaker.

One issue I come across is the wiki snippet when you type FileMaker into google, it displays an article for FileMaker Pro (an old product). My assumption is it defaults to this because the url is "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileMaker".

What is the best way to work with this? Should I update the existing FileMaker Pro article to be about the company (one already exists here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileMaker_Inc.), redirect the company article to the "new" article, and finally create a bunch of articles about the products.

Or should I create new articles for the products, and have the existing FileMaker Pro article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileMaker) redirect to FileMaker Inc. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileMaker_Inc.)?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlstampy (talk • contribs) 13:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid none of those is a good idea. Problems with Google knowledge graph are a Google issue; the information at Wikipedia is correct, and Wikipedia has no control over what Google or any other downstream user does with the information here. If it is wrong at Google or any other website outside of Wikipedia, then you'll need to work it out with that website. --Jayron32 14:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jayron32: I appreciate the comment, and we have made recent requests to Google. Our issue is actually the URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileMaker should be referring to FileMaker Inc. and not FileMaker Pro (a product built by FileMaker). I was asking what was the best way to correct that particular issue on Wikipedia. Dlstampy (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Ah! So you want the FileMaker Pro article moved to the title "FileMaker Pro" and you want the Filemaker Inc. article moved to FileMaker? Is that correct? Sorry I misunderstood. If that is the case, what I would do is start a move discussion (See WP:RM) at Talk:FileMaker and see if anyone objects or has any suggestions. If, after a few days, your proposed moves seem to have consensus, then it will be moved. --Jayron32 15:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

My bad. That's exactly it. Thanks I'll take a look at starting a move discussion! Dlstampy (talk) 15:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Silver Flying Cross awards list

Hello, I am questioning your list of the Silver Flying Cross recipients. My dad have received 2 but he is not on your list. How do I need to change this?

Thank You

Kristal Tighe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.129.146.128 (talk) 22:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Kristal. As far as I can tell, we do not have any article about a "Silver Flying Cross", or indeed any mention of such an award in any article on Wikipedia that I can discover. Are you referring to the Silver Star?

If you are not, please reply below with a link to the article you do mean.

Please be aware that lists of recipients in most articles about awards are not meant to be a complete list of all recipients, only of those that have a separate article about them on Wikipedia because they are "notable" (in Wikipedia's special sense of the term, please read the linked page) for reasons other than just their receiving the award. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.221.81.75 (talk) 23:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I think that the OP may be referring to the Distinguished Flying Cross (United Kingdom) article, but as TPFKA 87.81.230.195 said, such lists normally include only those people about whom Wikipedia articles exist. Deor (talk) 17:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Banner

Hi, a Wikipedian friend of mine passed away a few months ago. Recently, I got permission from their family to add a banner to their Wikipedia user and talk page to indicate what has happened. I got a link to a WP page about it, but I lost it. Can anyone help me? Thanks a lot. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 14:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Miss Bono. See guidance at Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians. GMG^talk 14:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

NPP/S

Can I get some more info about New Page Patrol/School? Is it similar to CVUA? I know both are different subjects, but I mean are they similar in training? Thanks, Knightrises10 (talk) 21:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

WP:NPP is an advance permission, unlike vandalism patrol. Minimum requirements are 6 months of editing, at least 500 mainspace edits and you must have demonstrated a clear understanding of WP:N, WP:NPOV, WP:COPYRIGHT and WP:COI. Additionally, you will need to be able to interact with new editors, so some experience here or at AfC is also considered a positive. NPP, while a rather new initiative in Wikipedia, is considered a very crucial role and administrators are quite selective as to who they grant the permission. John from Idegon (talk) 21:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

trying to prove notability for Derek Reese

Hello everyone i am working on an article for a musician Derek Reese. My article is in the draft stage, i am trying to show notability for Derek, i wanted to ask you a question, i came across pictures and video footage of Derek playing live onstage with the last poets at the national black theatre in harlem NY in 2011. Derek was on the bill for the show as a special guest, along with a few famous people such as, Doug E fresh, Bobbi Humphreys, comedian Paul Mooney but derek's name didn't appear on the advertisement. I even have a picture of a typed program guide which shows Derek Reese as a special guest. Is any of this useful for me to show notability for derek ? if so, how would i go about displaying the video and pictures i have ? as it stands right now, the pictures and video footage are not on the internet or newspaper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Derek_Reese_American_singer-songwriter_and_musician Thank you, Carolcappetta (talk) 01:45, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

If not using whole name, use Reese rather than Derek. You keep on adding stuff of poor quality and poorly referenced in the belief that quantity will succeed. So much of this is not about Reese, or not relevant to whether he is notable, such as what hospital he was born at, or stuff his parents did. I deleted stuff in attempt tp make it better, but still needs work. When you write that you "came across pictures and video," who took them? That person owns copyright. You cannot use. David notMD (talk) 02:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I am adding as much as i can, which is why the draft stage is good for me, thank you for cleaning it up :-)

Reese had a manager who took the pics and video who i am friends with.Can i get permission to use the pictures and video footage ?

Thank again David

Carolcappetta (talk) 03:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Carolcappetta. You posted above that Reese had a manager who took the pics and video who i am friends with and your first edit to Wikipedia was to create a draft about Reese. So, I'm wondering if there's some connection between the two because if there is then you might be considered to have a conflict of interest with respect to Reese when it comes to Wikipedia. Just for reference, Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit conflict-of-interest editing, but it is something which is highly discouraged because it can lead to some serious problems. So, the Wikipedia community has established certain guidelines that it asks such editors to follow and you can find out more about them at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. These guidelines are sort of an honor system in that you are encouraged to follow them because they can help you avoid having problems with other editors if you do. It's best to be as upfront about any COI you might have right from the start because it will not only make it easier for other editors to help you, but it might also make more editors want to help you.

As for your question about pics and videos, you might find Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files and Wikipedia:Image use policy helpful. Basically, the copyright holder of the content you want to use needs to give their explict consent to allow their work to be uploaded under a free license accepted by Wikipedia. This is a bit more involved then it sounds, so it might be a good idea for you to take a look at c:Commons:Licensing for more specific details. Commons and Wikipedia are technically separate Wikimedia Foundation projects with their own policies and guidelines, but copyright verification is one area which their policies tend to be the same.

Finally, you need to understand Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not if you want to avoid any problems when it comes to editing exisitng or creating new ones. Wikipedia articles are not intended to be a means for promoting their subjects or be sort of a "second official website" for their subjects. A Wikipedia article is not intended to be like Instagram or Facebook, updated daily with the most recent bit of news or photos, etc. Wikipedia article can in fact include negative content about the subject of the article as long as the content complies with relevant policies and guidelines, and the subject of the article doesn't have any final editorial control over article content. So, you might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing if by chance you're working on the draft at the behest of Reese (or one of his representatives) because he might not realize what he's getting into. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I am not Reese,writing an article about myself, and me being friends with reese’s Old manager isn’t a conflict of interest from what I have read.

I spoke to reese’s Manager to see if he might be able to add anything useful.

He mentioned the photos and video footage.

As far as notability, would this be useful ? As I have stated that the photos and video footage are not on the internet?

Carolcappetta (talk) 08:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

See also section #a little help editing ? above[1]. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

IMO, adding a picture of him at a show does not add to notability. And your adding more weak refs and inappropriate stuff to a draft just gives the potential reviewer more cause for rejecting it. Can you find refs that have several paragraphs about Reese, rather than simple mentions? Otherwise, this will never be approved. David notMD (talk) 08:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Good morning David,

Their are a few pictures of Reese and a video of him playing on stage with the last poets, but I guess that won’t cut it.

What I have found that has been written about Reese is his album reviews in performer magazine and the aquariun weekly.

His name is credited to a few recordings her participated in on major labels.

All of what I have found doesn’t seem to be enough unfortunately.

I will keep searching for results.

Carolcappetta (talk) 11:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I deleted two worthless refs (remember, quality over quantity). My suggestion is work on converting existing refs to proper Cite format and then resubmit. See WP:Referencing for beginners. Even if rejected, you will get information on where the weaknesses are. David notMD (talk) 16:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Carolcappetta: When I brought up COI editing in my last post, I was just trying to provide some general information about something that new editors often are unaware of when it comes to Wikipedia; I wasn’t accusing you of doing something improper. The same goes for the mention about writing about yourself; I only added that because many people eventually find out that having a Wikipedia article written about them is not as great as they originally thought it was going to be simply because they have no control over its content and cannot use it to promote themselves. I didn’t bring that up because I think you’re Reese.

As for images, I’m pretty sure their copyright status is not dependent upon whether they can be found online. So, if you’re the photographer who took the photos or video and want to upload your work under a free license accepted by Commons, then you can; however, if you’re not, the permission of the person who is needs to be verified. Now, being able to upload photos and videos doesn’t automatically mean they should be added to the draft/article, and further discussion maybe needed to establish a consensus for that. — Marchjuly (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

• I have a general question here. If the article gets accepted, would it be best to name it "Derek Reese" and move the current redirect Derek Reese to "Derek Reese (Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles character)"? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

How do I call other Users to look at a talk page?

I'm having a problem with a user. There's an article that's poorly written and is about two different topics (I verified this by showing it to real-life friends), and clearly needs to be split. One User (out of three, including myself) is ignoring most of my arguments and seems to want to keep the article as it is. How do I call on other Users for neutral outside help?Wacape (talk) 23:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

This must be about Neo-medievalism, which actually starts by stating that it's about two different topics. Maproom (talk) 23:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wacape. The Request for comment process is intended to bring uninvolved editors into discussions about content disputes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

1st Documented Church Shooting in the US

I am a police officer preparing a class on church violence - including church shootings. Although I've conducted research for the "first" documented church shooting in the US I cannot find anything. Any help you could offer would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.216.199 (talk) 19:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

You might have some more luck finding information at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities board. Regards SoWhy 20:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Have you looked at the articles that are members of Category:Attacks on places of worship in the United States? General Ization ^Talk 20:04, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

The earliest that I can find is Daingerfield_church_shooting in 1980. You can also read this report which states that there have been 139 shootings on church properties from 1980 to 2005. Ruslik_Zero 20:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

74, you might want to rethink your approach here. Places of worship (and limiting yourself to churches, which by definition are Christian houses of worship is clearly a distinction that serves no purpose in the analysis of a particular type of violence) have been significant gathering places for, well, forever. There were churches attacked on the frontier during the so called "Indian wars". If the class your prepping for is for church leaders, that is a rough subject, because whatever sound advice you have for them will have to be tempered and filtered through the congregation's and the denomination's interpretation of Jesus's teaching on brotherly love. I will say that since the incident in Texas, there are always at least three people that are carrying concealed at every service in my church, and sucky as it is, the leadership has drilled in responses to armed attack. Thanks for everything you do. John from Idegon (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Since you are after violence, bombing and burning might be included. If this is the case, you could take a look at the outline of incidents involving African American churches and work from there. Darwin Naz (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

How to contribute to Wikipedia ?

I am new to editing so I want to know how to contribute to Wikipedia.Shonku07 (talk) 06:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Shonku07: - welcome to Wikipedia! You can contribute in a wide array of ways, but the best revolve around editing articles to enhance them. Given that you are new to editing, perhaps edit in areas which you find interesting, be it via copyediting or the use of citations from reliable sources. Make sure you are familiar with Wikipedia's editing policy, and the five pillars of the encyclopedia. You should likely acquire some experience with editing before creating an article, but there is a guide for this. Remember, we are always here to assist should you need assistance with editing. Hope this helps, and best of luck with your editing aspirations, Stormy clouds (talk) 06:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Did I delete my own draft?

I was working on a draft late last night and didn't complete it. I came back to it this morning but left the page thinking I'd be able to find it later. Was my draft lost forever? I tried looking for it using various URLs but can't seem to find it. And, for future reference, how do I save my drafts? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uthoperis (talk • contribs) 02:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Uthoperis and welcome to the Teahouse.

Since there is nothing shown in your contributions list, it sounds as if you never actually saved your draft. Were you afraid of clicking on the "Publish" button? You should make a practice of saving your draft frequently by clicking on that button. That's the only way the text that you've been working on in your browser gets sent back to WP's servers. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I was scared of clicking the "Publish" button! So clicking that from a draft wont make the article "live" and I'll be able to come back to it? --Uthoperis (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it remains a draft and you can get back to it.

I think someone is collecting examples like this to take to the powers-that-be to get them to change the name of that button. I've been suggesting that we just call it "Send". I still think it's better to give users the option of when to save than to have the editing software send everything back keystroke-by-keystroke, which just seems wasteful and somewhat creepy. But I'm afraid this is bad news for you, you'll have to create your draft anew. If it's any consolation, some writers have reported that losing their novel-in-progress to a disk crash resulted in an even better novel when they had to start over. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it was pointed out to WMF that changing the title of the button from "Save" to "Publish" was causing much confusion to new contributors, but such remarks fell on deaf ears. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

About uploading logos

I wanted to confirm my understanding of the proper way to go about adding logos to articles. I'm currently working on a new article for The Hard Times, and I wanted to add their logo to the page (https://imgur.com/a/NKHjyND), but I'm not sure about the copyright policy around this. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Logos, logos are okay to include even if they're non free, but I don't know any of the source information around this image's copyright. Can I still use this logo, since the article will be about the site itself? Thisdangguy (talk) 06:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Thisdangguy. The answer is Yes, provided your use complies with all the conditions in the non-free content criteria. It is your responsibility to make sure you do comply with all these; but if so, the copyright status of the image is irrelevant. --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Question

Hi, can somehow help me review some of my created articles put on my userpage??? Also I want to ask for genuine advise, can it be regarded as being mischievous if I ask kindly of an administrator to consider giving me rights to patrol/or rollback? I have been trying to revert vandalism - made notable mistakes while doing so and learnt by each contribution -, also checking and improving new articles and welcoming new users and tagging for deletion not so good ones. I have completely fallen in love with all these ateas but I need a candid talk on my actions. I also recently began serious participation. I thank you 6Packs (talk) 11:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey 6Packs. Well they all seem to be on notable topics, and are in areas where I expect we are seriously lacking in coverage, since the English Wikipedia, as an English project, tends to heavily favor topics related to majority English speaking parts of the world. They are all very short stubs though, and it seems unlikely that you would qualify for New Page Patrol yet if most of your experience is only in making stubs, since page patrollers have to be able to evaluate a pretty wide range of articles with a pretty wide range of quality. It also looks like you've gotten a recent warning for making a mistake in tagging for speedy deletion. Everybody makes mistakes, but patrollers have to be especially careful in this respect, since incorrectly tagging articles for deletion can quickly help to scare away new editors who are just getting the hang of things.

I'm not sure how much experience you have with counter-vandalism, since that's kindof a hard thing to quickly judge. It doesn't look like you've ever reported a user to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and that's often a good indication whether someone has experience with how we normally escalate warnings up to reporting a user to have them blocked. I'd probably recommend try to spend half an hour or so a day doing counter vandalism work if you have the time, and in a month or so look to request rollback at WP:PERM. I'd also recommend playing around with the filter options at Special:RecentChanges, which can help to narrow changes down to the most problematic that need obvious reverting. GMG^talk 12:20, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Creation of an article: Akihiro Yamada - Wikipedia

Dear Administrators,

I have found in your Teahouse page the following(its URL:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia: Teahouse&oldid=859851817): "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 124.40.70.66 (talk) at 18:25, 16 September 2018 (→‎Creation of an entry (or article): 'Akihiro Yamada - Wikipedia': new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision. (diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)".

Please tell me what I should do after this. Thank you.

Best wishes. Akihiro Yamada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.40.70.66 (talk) 12:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

• Here is the archived query in question. Essentially, the IP asked about the creation of an article about themselves in en.wikipedia.org, translated from their entry in ja.wikipedia, but was aware that they could not create a translated autobiographical article themselves owing to the obvious conflict of interest. They were subsequently advised to refrain from editing matters related to themselves, and advised of the potential pitfalls of an article about one's self. Finally, the ultimate advice given, which still stands, is that, if a subject is notable enough to merit an article, someone else will create it. If this is not satisfactory, consider requesting a translation. Given the existence of the Japanese article, the inertia to create an English one, given sufficient coverage in reliable sources, is likely lower than from scratch, but such a request would still be heavily scrutinised, and the downsides of an article would still persist. Hope this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Retrieval/upgradation of write-up on Sikhareswar Jena to an article

User:Jena_Amiya_Kumar/sandbox/SIKHARESWAR_JENA

Respected sir, Kind attention: Mr.Marchjuly

The article on Sikhareswar Jena who led Odisha Fire service for nearly a decade,1980s and whose idea of setting up rural Fire stations,impacting the lives of of majority of population of Odisha,particularly in its countryside,the first Fire officer,being awarded the President's award for meritorious service in 1980 , a notable Fire engineer of Odisha, needs to be reviewed and upgraded to an article as it meets all wikipedia guidelines.He was largely responsible for development of Odisha Fire service in post-independent India.He used to deliver talks on fire-fighting and prevention regularly in All India Radio and Doordarshan in 1980s,which are not preserved due to lack of Archival facilities then and computerisation.He has no doubt impacted rural common folk of Odisha in fire services in fire-fighting and prevention.He was a leading fire engineer of Odisha.I have supplemented the write-up on Sikhareswar Jena, duly edited by esteemed editor,Ammarpad.I earnestly request that the article on Sikhareswar Jena,who is no more, be upgraded to an Article.With warm regards and submissions. Rkranndhir (talk) 06:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

If you wish to address your remarks specifically to User:Marchjuly, the place to do so is on the editor's user talk page, User talk:Marchjuly.

The draft currently has many unsourced statements, so to comply with Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability you need to find references to published reliable sources independent of the subject to support those statements. The references you have are all bare URLs, and it would aid reviewers if you would expand them, preferably by filling in the relevant parameters in a template such as {{cite web}}. You will find further advice at WP:Your first article, and after reading that and taking note of the advice, if you are convinced that he satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria you can submit the draft for review by adding {{subst:submit} to the top of the draft. It was pointed out at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 813#Sikhareswar Jena that the draft at that time did not demonstrate notability; there has been no substantial improvement in the draft since then, so I suspect that the subject (however worthy in his own field) may not meet the requirements in WP:Notability (people). --David Biddulph (talk) 07:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Respected sir,Mr. Marchjuly Noted sir.Thanks a lot for the prompt response.I will review the same as per wikipedia guidelines and abide by your valuable advice.Warm regards, Rkranndhir (talk) 07:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I have dispassionately reviewed the draft and vetted the verifiable references to reliable websites.Due lack of Archival facilities,many references to newspapers/press releases could not be referred.As such,the draft is primarily based on matters of fact which can be verified by any discerning editor fro Odisha.The draft is submitted for your valuable editing and approval.

No need to post the entire draft, when a link to User:Jena_Amiya_Kumar/sandbox/SIKHARESWAR_JENA works fine

{{subst:submit} Sikhareswar Jena 1 Early life and education 2 Professional activities 3 Social activities 4 Reference Early life and education: Sikhareswar Jena, one of the decorated Fire Engineers of Odisha, was born in village, Baladiabandha,8 KM from Dhenkanal Town, Odisha on 3rd January 1934, third child of the six children of Late Gouranga Charan Jena and Late Kali Jena. After passing matriculation from his alma mater, B.B. High School, Dhenkanal, he studied in Ravenshaw College and Christ College, Cuttack. He was married to Mrs Jamuni Jena. Professional activities: During his college days, he joined Fire Department as Station Fire Officer on 7th February,1955. During his service under Odisha Government, he completed his Graduate degree in Fire Engineering successfully from National Fire Service College, Nagpur under Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India [1].He had risen to the highest technical rank in Odisha Fire service, and continued as State Fire Officer,Odisha(later rechristened as Chief Fire Officer vide Govt. of Odisha Order No.1228/CD dt.25.11.10),looking after administration of Odisha Fire service for nearly a decade [2]. He was responsible for development of State Fire Training Institute,Baramunda, Bhubaneswar, Odisha both functionally and infrastructure-wise during its formative period, serving as Principal (Fire Officer) for two terms[3] As State Fire Officer, Odisha during eighties, he was responsible for setting of a number of Fire Stations in rural hinterland of Odisha to provide fire services at doorstep, to name a few, Balijhari, Banki, Daspala etc.The Fire Stations were hitherto confined to District Headquarters and subdivisional Headquarters.The concept of rural Fire Stations was espoused by him,being instrumental in implementing the same.This had then impacted the lives of common folk of Odisha where majority of people used to live countryside and fire was the major hazard in villages,causing loss of lives and property.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odisha) He was the first Fire Officer to be awarded President’s Medal for Meritorious service in the year 1980 on the occasion of Republic Day in Odisha vide GoI President's Sectt. Notification no.18- Pres./80 dated 26th Jan 1980,[4] available on the websites of DG,Fire Services,Civil Defence and Home Guards,Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India and Odisha Fire Service on list of awardees[5]. He was responsible for modernization of Odisha Fire Service during eighties, being Fire Officer, Odisha. His talks on fire prevention and fire-fighting were periodically organised in All India Radio,Cuttack and local Doordarshan in eighties. Social activities: He was also a great social activist, ensuring the transfer of land and for setting up Gourang Charan Vidyapitha,(only co-educational High School) at Baladiabandha, Dhenkanal. He similarly donated land and funds for establishment of temple of Lord Shiva, named Sikhareswar Temple, a non-profitable endeavour at Baladiabandha,Dhenkanal. This temple is the epicentre of religio-cultural development of the area. After his superannuation from Odisha Government on 31st January 1992, he was active in all socio-cultural activities.He passed away in his home, G.S Bhawan, Kunjakanta, Dhenkanal in wee hours on 31st July 1994. Reference <http://nfscnagpur.nic.in/> <http://odishafshgscd.gov.in/?q=node/16> <http://rtiodisha.in/pa/T1RILzEvMTM3NC8xOQ==>. http://dgfscdhg.gov.in/sites/default/files/Notifications.pdf> <http://odishafshgscd.gov.in/?q=node/88>

Rkranndhir (talk) 10:27, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rkranndhir: Please don’t copy and paste the entire draft into a Teahousevdiscussion again. A link to the draft is more than sufficient. The draft is basically in the same state it was when it was last discussed at the Teahouse. If you want to submit for review, then follow the instructions given above by David Biddulph and have an AfC reviewer look at it. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Sir, Noted Please.Will abide.Warm regards Rkranndhir (talk) 13:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Editors erase the information I add

In one page I saw that there is not having the External link in that page so I add one External link into that page. The external link which I added is not a very famous website but it has the relevant source on their website, but this was rolled on by editors, So It is required only famous website links?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harshil84 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Harshil84: Welcome to Teahouse! The user provided the summary here, "doesn't seem notable link. Now coming to your point, WP:EL says Some external links are welcome, but it is not Wikipedia's purpose to include a lengthy or comprehensive list of external links related to each topic. Therefore, the article without any external link doesn't look bad at all. You may read WP:ELNEVERand WP:ELNO for more info about external links. I'm not sure about the external link you added, so it would be better if you ask that editor on their talk page. Knightrises10 (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Knightrises10: Thanks for your help, But If possible can you please tell me the reason that why the editor remove the external link, my external link is http://www.whyit.in/bojack-horseman/

::@Harshil84: According to WP:ELMAYBE, Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources. can be included as external links. Therefore, I see no reason to remove the link. The editor claimed it to be a Non-notable link, but according to the policy, they can be included. I would never have reverted that link. Maybe that user made some mistake. You can discuss it with them at their talk page. Happy editting . Knightrises10 (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to disagree with Knightrises10, a personal website maintained by 2 young laypeople (per [2]) without clear evidence of expertise does not meet the requirements of WP:ELMAYBE. @Harshil84:, just in case you are one of the site's authors: please do not add links to your own website(s). If you believe such a link would be useful, you should suggest it at the article's talkpage instead and let uninvolved editors decide on a case by case base. All such article-related questions are best discussed on the article's talkpage. I have also left a few additional links with information about external links on your user talkpage. GermanJoe (talk) 14:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your additional links GermanJoe, I understand that this is my mistake that I don't talk to you before editing because I don't know about that and If you think that two new person does not make a relevant concept so this is I think little bit wrong and I think it is relevant. Thanks for your help

How to edit protected or semi protected pages?

Please tell me how to edit protected pages?Shonku07 (talk) 07:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Shonku07 and welcome to the Teahouse.

You can't edit protected pages directly, but you can almost always make an edit request on the talk page of the article. Be quite specific about the change you want made to the article. Another editor with the necessarily user rights will take your request under consideration and perform it for you. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Remember to include reliable sources to support your change. —AE (talk • contributions) 14:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Looking to hire a Pro to teach me 1 on 1

Hi,

I have been using wikipedia as a resource since day 1. I have a degree in history, and a lot of experience researching and writing proposals, and blog articles, but feel kind of lost here. I tried adding/citing references to my article, and kept having a hard time adding them for whatever reason. I now saw that it isnt a good idea to write an autobiography, and feel like I just made a big mistake (Wish I read the guide more clearly first before trying to dive in and write).... I did it to clear the air about some nasty rumors about me, in addition to practicing a bit, but I feel like I failed miserably... Would love if there was some kind of 1 on 1 tutoring class on mastering wikipedia with someone, or to teach me how to navigate wikipedia like a pro :( ... In other words, H E L P Please! I want to be a contributor for both editing and writing, as wikipedia is like a giant library, and a historians dream. Thanks in advance for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solonz1 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Solonz1: Have you heard about Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure? It's a fun way to learn the basics of editing. Regards SoWhy 19:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

You'll also want to check this out: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Solonz. I guess you now recognise that we don't encourage editors to write articles about themselves, and that you've rather walked into that trap. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. This might sound harsh, but I'd suggest you blank all the different version of your biography from your various sandbox pages (don't panic - deleting the text still keeps a copy in the history of each page, so you can retrieve bits later if you wish (or save them off-site). Then just write four of five factual lines, showing why you should be regarded as 'notable'. What that means is that you must either meet our WP:NBIO or WP:NMUSICIAN criteria. - simply put, can you demonstrate with links to Reliable, independent sources how you meet those criteria. If you headlined President Clinton's farewell concert in 2001, there must be lots of news coverage and stories about you - though I fear I couldn't find anything, except your own website, which we'd have to ignore. To insert a reference, look in the editing tool for a 'Cite' button which then gives you various templates to fill in (source details, newspaper, date, author, article title etc). It's quite straightforward once you've found that Cite button. Having done that, you'll have a short skeletal framework with none of the hyperbole and unprovable childhood trivia that you've currently included. It'd just be the bare bones that shows why you, amongst a million other musicians, merit a page here by having been written in some detail about by others. We base all articles here on what others have written about the subject, not what the subjects wants to say about themselves. Having done that, you could go to Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters and invite non-connected editors to write about you, and provide a link to those key references on your sandbox. Just bear in mind that, if there are nasty rumours out there about you, and the stories have been reported, you will have absolutely no control of any Wikipedia page that might be created about you. Both the good stuff and the nasty stuff, if reliably sourced, will probably end up in it, and you can do absolutely nothing about that, nor delete the bits that upet you (assuming they're true and reliably cited, of course). The 'Requested Article' process can take a very long time indeed, so it's good that you have your own website to promote yourself, as that's most definitely not what Wikipedia is here to do for you or anyone else. I hope this helps a little. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Solonz. Nick has explained how you should go about writing your autobiography, but if you're genuinely more interested in improving the encyclopedia, I suggest you drop the idea and focus on editing other topics as well. To seek mentorship from an experienced user, you can ask interested users via this page. To do that, click "talk" next to the adopter's name, click the new section tab on the top right hand corner of the talk page, then write a short request for adoption. Note that it may take some time for adopters to respond. In the mean time, here is always a good place to ask questions, and you can join the help channel on IRC as well. Since you seem interested in editing history related topics, you might find Wikipedia:WikiProject History interesting. Best of luck. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 07:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all your help and advice everyone, much appreciated! I just completed the interactive earth adventure tutorial, which helped me get up to speed a bit, and will start continuing my learning here. I will approach experienced users for adoption, and help. History, politics, music and cooking are my areas of strength, so will see about helping in these areas somehow. Embarassed to say that I haven't made a bibliography or references in over 20 years since I was back in college studying history, but it should all come back to me fairly easy. A bit rusty though, lol. Thank you very much again! Solonz1 (talk) 00:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Solonz1: Well done for starting The Wikipdia Adventure. There are a total of 15 different badges to complete in total - so do carry on until the end if you can. If you start it again you do end up more than one "Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!" on your Talk page, but you can easily delete the duplicates - or indeed all of them - if you so wish. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Did I archive correctly?

I was wondering if someone more experienced could see if I archived correctly. I don't see any mistakes, but I'd really like someone to verify that there aren't any. Also, I was wondering if user talk pages have a different procedure than article talk pages if they are on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Archive_requests, because it looks like some user's who have their talk pages on there have been inactive for a while. Clovermoss (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Clovermoss and welcome to the Teahouse.

I just looked at the archiving you did for Talk:John R. Bolton. On the whole, you did nothing particularly wrong, but since you asked for advice let me make some suggestions.

1. It would generally be better to set up automatic archiving rather than manual archiving. There are many archived talk pages and you can get an idea from looking at them what parameters people generally prefer to pass to the archive bot.
2. In the Bolton archive you created, you carried away even fairly recent threads. I believe leaving something like 2–4 threads visible on the talk page is better than trimming it to just the banners and boilerplate, even if that means leaving a somewhat old thread on the talk page. The point of archiving is to make talk pages more manageable, not to hide older stuff by an additional layer of indirection.
3. Your new Bolton archive has an archive template at both the top and the bottom. I think just one at the top is standard.
4. The earlier Bolton archives have date ranges. When you added yours, it would have been good to update the list in the archives box with a date range for Archive_3 for consistency. Also, as a matter of consistency, the interchangeability of underscore and spaces in file names means that you could have been more similar to the earlier archives.

So, on the whole, nothing that needs undoing, but a few things to keep in mind when you do this in the future. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

As far as the user talk pages go, I would just leave them, especially users who appear to be inactive. Once you learn how to set up automatic archives, you could reach out to still-active users who have requested help and get them going. But make the offer on their talk page and engage with them a bit on the available options; don't just act based on the archive request template. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: I would just add to the helpful advice above by saying that when I look at an article's talk page, I want to know whether there has been a) no discussion for the last 10 years, or b) tons of it. If there's lots, I still want to see much of the recent activity without having to go into an archive. But if I see an empty article talk page, I probably wouldn't think of looking for the archive box. So, as suggested above, take care not to remove and archive too many discussions please. I think you did archived much too much of the recent discussions at Talk:John R. Bolton, so leaving the talk page completely empty and, personally, I'm happy with Talk:Economy of Belgium and wouldn't think it needs archiving, despite someone adding it to the category of pages needing archiving. I'd slightly disagree with jmcgnh in that, unless incredibly active, occasional manual archiving of an article's talk page is probably preferable to over-zealous automatic archiving which sweeps away discussions into a less accessible corner. On an article talk page that's unlikely to make me suspicious - just frustrated. Though when I see this happening on a user's talk page about whom I see surprising types of activity, I get both frustrated and suspicious as to why this is happening. Hope these observations are of interest. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)  

@Nick Moyes: Yes, over-zealous automatic archiving is to be avoided. Except for the bot's inability to distinguish between old-and-resolved and old-and-inactive-but-unresolved threads, using the parameters to keep at least four threads and to keep threads active within the past 30-180 days (depending on how active the talk page has been) should meet all of your objections. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

how cite journal without author?

Economist mag does not provide author byline, which template seems to require. Please advise.TBR-qed (talk) 13:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, TBR-qed. Welcome to the Teahouse. Good question. Simple answer: Just leave out the fields you can't complete, but include journal, article title, page number, date, publisher and all other information that is available. Hope that's OK. regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi TBR-qed If you check some of the examples given Template:Cite journal, you’ll find some in which there is no byline or credited author. Basically, you say as much in the template’s syntax, but it will appear to the reader as not having an author. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Still not working. My 2 dates are Economist, 8 and 15 September, 2018 with pages. What is wrong with:

and Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

If you follow the help link to Help:CS1 errors#bad date it tells you acceptable date formats.

Try and --David Biddulph (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

References

Teahouse, village pump, help desk

I have a doubt. What is the difference in the questions to be asked in WP:TH, WP:VP and WP:HD?--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 13:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

• @Path slopu: TH and HD are essentially equivalent, the only difference is that the Teahouse is aimed at new editors, so ceteris paribus editors there have more patience for answering hundreds of standard queries ("my article was deleted") and less experience of intricate points of policy ("how should we categorize redirects from a defunct company to a notable product"). The various village pumps are to discuss issues with the wider WP community, not to ask a question that you expect to have one good answer; however, the technical village pump, intended essentially for reporting technical glitches, has become the port of call for technical questions about intricate template syntax, bot operation, etc. (that is technically out of scope, but the VPT crowd has the technical knowledge to answer those queries and does not seem to mind too much). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:31, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Tigraan:Thank you very much.PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 13:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

... and there's Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests, which seems to duplicate the function of the Help Desk. Maproom (talk) 18:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Violation

A user called Ekramul56 is violating Wikipedia copyrights so I have reverted but I saw he is already got a warning so I wanted to block him but how can I block?Shonku07 (talk) 11:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Ekramul 56 has made small edits to Ke Apon Ke Por and other India media articles, none of which as quick look appear to be copyright violations. And has no Block warning on Talk page. Can you indicate the article in question? David notMD (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I wondered if Shonku07 might have been referring to another language Wikipedia, but that account has not edited any other, and Ekramul 56 has only edited here and at simple.wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

On deeper look, Ekramul 56 does have two copyright warnings from back in August, but nothing more recent. David notMD (talk) 14:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Shonku07 gone (repeat sockpuppet). David notMD (talk) 20:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

How do I test a template for a new infobox?

Hi, I'm trying to make a new infobox template, but I don't know how to test it to see if it works. I've go the text I want to try, and I've tried the template sandboxes, but I haven't had any luck in getting it to take the text I've put together and display it as an infobox. Any thoughts? Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 22:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: If you refer to User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz/sandbox#Diocese Infobox (Anglican) then the code {{Infobox diocese (Anglican)|...}} is not a template but a template call of Template:Infobox diocese (Anglican). There is no such template so nothing happens. A template page similar to Template:Infobox diocese has to be created with code to specify how each parameter should be treated. This is difficult. See Help:Template and Template:Infobox. I sometimes test templates by placing a call of the template inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> on the template page itself. Then changes in the template can be tested with preview without having to first save the template. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter:Thanks. I checked your links. Looks like I don't have the coding skill for it.  :( The reason I'm trying to create the new template is that the current "infobox:Diocese" is specifically designed for Catholic dioceses. If you check the Talk page, you'll see that I've been unsuccessful in trying to get Anglican terms added. Since I don't want to start a sectarian war on Wiki, I thought I'd just design one that works for Anglican dioceses, but it looks like it's beyond me. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 23:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

How to revert on iPad???

How do I revert edits on iPad. I do not know how to. If you don’t know. I am fine. Thank you very much. Huff slush7264 23:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Undo editing options are still there but you need to manage the iOs differences, if you undo and check and submit it is done. Dave Rave (talk) 03:02, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Huff slush7264: I frequently edit with an old iPhone. I prefer to switch to 'desktop' view rather than mobile view (via The link at the very bottom of the page), and then everything is just as it is when working from the computer. To undo an edit, go to View History tab at the relevant page. Each row there shows each individual edits added. Look for the word Undo at the end of the entry and, if appropriate, click that to revert the latest edit. Hope thus helps. Regards from th Uk,  Nick Moyes (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Changing main title of post

How do I modify the title rather than the text of a post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irarabrams (talk • contribs) 23:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you probably have a conflict of interest; please see WP:COI. You need to add some secondary sources; see WP:PSTS. The title will be changed if and when the article is accepted .... it will be moved (see WP:MOVE) to article space. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Ira R. Abrams, Visual Anthropologist and Ethnographic Filmmaker Presumed autobiographical given User name, submitted for review, and unlikely to be approved as is.David notMD (talk) 10:05, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Relisting discussion

Hi Teahouse, How would I go about relisting the merge discussion at Pomona-Pitzer Sagehens? Thanks! - Sdkb (talk) 10:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Sdkb: Since you don't know, then you probably shouldn't. Editors relisting discussions are expected to already know how to do that and be conversant with variety of policies and guidelines. You also commented in favor, so just leave it another editor will come around and do what is needed. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)